Part II: Restructuring sectors and the sectoral balance of the economy

9. Agro-eco-restructuring: Potential for sustainability

(introductory text...)

Editor's note

The broad situation

Identifying the limiting factors

The technological feasibility of sustainable agriculture

The possible course towards sustainable change

Final remarks

Notes

References

The technological feasibility of sustainable agriculture

It should not be necessary to emphasize yet again to the readers
of this book that an essential characteristic of sustainable future economic
systems must be to minimize the energy and material inputs per service
(production) unit, in all sectors. In the realm of food production, organic
agriculture is the most appropriate concept. By careful husbanding of soils and
landscapes, by relying on site-oriented biodiversity in order to be able to use
a maximum of natural synergisms, and by intensive nutrient recycling it
minimizes external inputs. Thus, it achieves a maximum net harvest of solar
energy in forms usable to humans. In this way it preserves and even improves the
soil and achieves the highest possible yields in a way that can be practiced for
a virtually unlimited time-horizon. In the remainder of this paper, small-scale
mixed agriculture in developing countries will not be addressed specifically.
Its merits are widely accepted and documented (e.g. Hiemstra et al. 1992; Radtke
1995). I refer to the experience of institutions such as the Bakara Agricultural
College in Molo, Kenya. This started as a conventional training school, but it
has evolved into an exemplar of site-oriented small-scale mixed agriculture
including agroforestry in order to achieve a maximum of sustainable yield and a
diverse diet, unburdened by the residues of agro-chemicals detrimental to human
health.

The emphasis hereafter is on the potential of organic agriculture
in the present bread-basket countries of the North (i.e. in the industrialized
countries). In the following paragraphs, the principal concepts, historical
examples, and actual comparisons are presented as evidence that there is a
realistic and socially beneficial way out of the "Malthusian food trap" if we
are prepared to surmount and challenge the rules of the present game.

The gardening concept

There is evidence that a gardening-like cultivation system with a
high input of labour (~0.3 persons per ha), a high turnover of nutrients, and a
balanced pattern of mixed cropping is capable of out producing low-labour
(mechanized) agricultural production systems by at least three-fold. In times of
worldwide structural unemployment it would be a wise strategy to rely on this
concept in order to meet future food shortages. But the intelligent intermediate
step would be to preserve the skills needed to manage highly productive mixed
agricultural systems that later can be more easily intensified towards a
gardening like pattern of cultivation. In this light, small-scale mixed
agriculture can be seen as the starting block for stepping up agricultural
productivity in the future in a sustainable way.

Germany in World War II

I observed an example of (enforced) low-input/maximum-output
agriculture in my youth. I was adopted by a farmer family after my father was
killed by the Nazis. According to all traditional expectations, Germany - being
cut off from all external supplies of food, fertilizers, and agro-chemicals -
should have come to starvation point within at least one or two years. But, in
spite of massive military destruction, organic agriculture guaranteed the
necessary minimum supplies until the end of the war. In fact, invading Allied
forces found and captured strategic food reserves in storehouses. Over and above
its own population, the German agricultural system had to feed an additional
customer in the east because the Red Army could not rely on its own supplies.
The dramatic (but temporary) food shortage of 1945 occurred because spring
planting was impeded by warfare and seeds were destroyed or consumed for food
throughout much of the countryside.

The example of German war agriculture also answers one standard
argument against small-scale mixed agriculture, the argument that long-distance
supply to towns and cities is not manageable. Even with primitive means (such as
horse-drawn wagons and trucks powered by gas from wood pyrolysis), with
processing and packaging mainly in small units by hand, an efficient system of
collection, storage, and distribution was organized. This task would surely be
achieved much more easily by employing advanced technology (microelectronics,
informatics, and telecommunications) for networking and designing satisfactory
supply systems. Crisis scenarios that were simulated in the 1980s for the
Netherlands, Germany, and Finland confirm this past experience (Bakker 1985;
Henze 1980; Kettunen 1986).

The potential of organic agriculture in temperate climates

Some preliminary remarks have to be made with respect to the
validity of existing comparisons between conventional and organic
agriculture.17 First there is a general tendency to underestimate the
productivity of organic agriculture for four reasons:

1. Organic agriculture stems from a revolutionary
´'bottom-up" movement. It still has relatively little scientific support,
because R&D funding by government and industry is directed to support
mainstream activities.

2. In order to achieve full productivity by building up the humus
content of soils and optimizing the farmer's skills (including the choice of
appropriate crop rotations and intermediate crops), a "learning" period of about
10 years is typically necessary.

3. Organic farmers have always asked for support because of the
initial yield-lag during the transformation phase.

4. In many cases shortage of affordable labour is a limiting
factor, because the question of labour intensity cannot be addressed within the
present system of agricultural support and mainstream economic philosophy. This
bottleneck could be overcome by a future ecological tax reform that taxed the
consumption of nonrenewable materials and primary energy carriers on the one
side and reduced the direct and indirect taxation of labour on the
other.

Thus assessment of the productivity potential of organic
agriculture has also to take into account these short-term temporary
disadvantages. Comparisons between conventional and organic agriculture,
assuming similar endowments of labour and machinery, suggest a much higher
energy efficiency for organic agriculture. The improvement ranges from 48 per
cent to 64 per cent. But there is a corresponding short-term drop in yield of up
to 30 per cent (Haas and Köpke 1994; Berardi 1977). One study observed a 10 per
cent reduction in natural produce yields when comparing 14 pairs of conventional
and organic farms in the eastern central states of the United States (Lockeretz
et al. 1976). A 1980 study by the US Department of Agriculture (USDA 1980) in
the US Midwest found not only a much higher energy efficiency for organic
agriculture but also similar or better average yields per surface area unit. In
the case of wheat there was no significant difference between the two. In the
case of soybeans, organic methods produced 14 per cent higher average yields.

In Europe a number of similar studies have been made (Granstedt
1990; Rist et al. 1989). They have estimated a 20-30 per cent reduction in
yields, based on the average performance of organic farms. Bechmann et al.
(1992) propose compensating for the yield reduction by changing the European
diet (reducing the present physiologically detrimental over consumption of
meat). Meyer (1989), building on a study by Rist, has calculated for the Canton
of Zug (in Switzerland) that only 1,430-1,600 m2 (0.14-0.16 ha) of
organically farmed land would suffice to feed one adult person. This differs
favourably from the 0.5 ha demanded by Pimentel et al. (1994) in order to
provide a diverse nutritious diet of plant and animal products. To take an
extreme case, a diet based largely on potatoes could feed an adult person from
only 110 m2 assuming maximum productivity and from 300-400
m2 assuming average productivity (Walker 1979).

Based on these facts it is possible to make the following rough
judgements. The earth is now providing about 4.6 billion ha of land usable for
agricultural purposes. About one-third is arable land and two-thirds permanent
grassland (ISOE 1995). Divided by a world population of 5.77 billion in 1996,
the current world per capita endowment amounts to 0.25 ha of arable land and
0.50 ha of grassland. Thus there is still sufficient (but not ample) room for
adjustment towards a global eco-restructuring of the agricultural supply systems
without the threat of increased starvation. On the contrary, given appropriate
incentives, humanity could save its resource base for future generations and
still achieve food security.

In assessing future potentials, the performance of the best
farmers should serve as a measuring rod, because they are the spearhead of
future development. Personal observation of Austrian organic farms, especially
the well-documented model farm of Hermann Pennwieser, shows that within a period
of 10 years the humus content of soils increased by one-third (1.5-2 per cent
per annum), and that soil life, soil structure, and water storage capacity also
increased significantly (Sinabel 1991). One surprising effect is also that the
incidence of plant diseases actually decreased, which indicates a strengthening
of the plant's immune systems. The average yields of these organic farms are at
the same high level as in comparable Austrian conventional farms.

Besides estimating the potential of sustainable organic
agriculture, it is also important to assess the resource conservation potential
of organic agriculture if it were adopted globally. The energy efficiency of
organic agriculture has already been noted. In addition to the examples cited
above, a US study by Lampkin (1990) concluded that conventional
high-input/high-output agriculture consumes 2.3 times more energy compared with
organic farms.

The contribution of organic farming vis-à-vis soil erosion is
vitally important. There is clear evidence that soil erosion can be drastically
reduced. Reganold et al. (1987) observed a yearly erosion of 8.3 t/ha on organic
fields and 32.4 t/ha on conventional ones. Erosion is reduced by three major
characteristics of organic agriculture:

- crop rotation, the concept of evergreen agriculture
(continuous coverage of the soil by plants), mixed cropping, and underseeding
reduce the susceptibility of soil to erosion (Lindenthal et al. 1996);

It is usually argued that there are no alternatives to the present
high inputs of nitrogen, phosphorus, and potassium (NPK). If all farmers of the
world were to follow the high-input model, the minable deposits of phosphorus
would be exhausted in about 80 years (Scheller 1991, 1993). The same holds for
potassium and for fossil organic resources, which are the base of nitrogen
fertilizers (Barney 1980). In addition, the high energy input for the supply of
mineral fertilizers has to be taken into account. Nutrient-efficient cultivation
techniques are, therefore, a conditio sine qua non for long-term
sustainable food supply

Organic agriculture tries to achieve maximum nutrient recycling by
integrating plant and animal production and by using all by-products and wastes.
Following this concept, nearly balanced nutrient cycles can be achieved (FAT
1994). As far as phosphorus and potassium are concerned, use of the nutrient
reserves in the soils and of their geo genous potential, combined with the
recycling of organic residuals, can be considered to be a proper intermediate
strategy. In the very long term, agriculture must achieve a near closure of
nutrient material cycles.

Nitrogen efficiency deserves a separate comment.
Conventional agriculture now imports nutrients in nearly unlimited quantities,
which have resulted in a nitrogen surplus (N-surplus) in areas where this has
been going on for many years. In contrast, organic agriculture limits itself to
nutrient recycling and to legumes as sources of nitrogen. In addition, organic
farms normally observe the restriction of not more than two large animal units
per hectare. Because organic farms are forced to economize on nitrogen inputs,
the N-surplus on organic farms is much lower. For the agricultural areas of
Germany, for the years 1991 and 1992, Isermann et al. (1994) have calculated a
surplus of 145 kg N/ha. In contrast, organic agriculture caused smaller N
surpluses of 37-76 kg/ha (Haas and Köpke 1994). This is clearly reflected in the
nitrate content of groundwater. Research in Bavaria found that on average the
nitrate content was 79 ppm/litre under areas of conventional agriculture with
livestock raising and 42 ppm/ litre without livestock (Brandhuber and Hege
1992). Under organically farmed areas the nitrate content of groundwater was, on
average, 27 ppm/litre, thus being within safe limits.

Agriculture has always tried to optimize the living conditions of
plants and animals and to protect them. Organic agriculture has the same aim.
Enlightened organic agriculture therefore does not refuse external aids
completely (as some fundamentalists do), but it cuts them to a minimum and tries
to rely mainly on the employment of natural synergisms and intensive care. Under
these auspices, further increases in the effectiveness and productivity of
organic agriculture can be expected. This judgement is underpinned by the fact
that political support and public funding of research work in this field are
also increasing (USNRC 1989; Lindenthal et al. 1996).

Based on the above evidence, it can be said that pragmatic organic
agriculture is a realistic pathway to feed the growing world population and to
secure the natural resource base needed for a long term sustainable future. But
it has to be complemented by other measures, especially efficiency of food
distribution. Most important of all, there must be effective measures to
stabilize world population in order to secure a high quality of life for all
citizens of the globe in the long
term.